The Trump presidency has been marked by a series of revelations that expose a deeper, more insidious form of corruption than mere financial misdeeds. It's about the deliberate attempt to reshape the very fabric of American governance, moving away from a system governed by the rule of law towards one where personal favor with the president becomes the ultimate determinant of power and privilege.
This transformation is not just about individual actions but about a systemic shift that could have far-reaching consequences for the nation's future. The framework provided by political scientists Douglass C. North, John Joseph Wallis, and Barry R. Weingast in their book 'Violence and Social Orders' offers a lens to understand this phenomenon.
In their model, societies are categorized into two types: the 'natural state' and the 'open access state'. The natural state, prevalent throughout history, is characterized by self-serving elites who profit through rent-seeking, using their control over power and resources to extract money from others. This is akin to the medieval system where nobles owned land in perpetuity, extracting fees from peasants.
In contrast, the open access state is defined by formal neutrality, where access to power and privilege is determined by legal rules, not personal relationships or inherited advantages. This system allows for the challenge of entrenched interests and the outcompeting of elites in the marketplace, fostering an impersonal politics where the rule of law prevails.
Trump's actions, from creating a personal fund to immunizing himself from IRS audits to making stock trades just before policy decisions affecting the companies he trades with, are all attempts to bend the rules of the open access state towards a natural state. He is replacing the impersonal logic of American governance with a system of favoritism based on personal access to the president.
This shift has profound implications. It changes the incentive structure in corporate America and the legal world, making personal connections and flattery more important than substantive arguments for getting what you want from the White House. This could lead to economic stagnation, as seen in countries like Hungary, where corruption has led to the degradation of public services and the arts.
The dangers of this transformation are clear. Trump's rule is not about a full-scale overthrow but about blending the natural state logic into institutions still nominally built around open-access principles. This could mean that even if Trump is defeated in the 2026 midterms, the damage to the American social order will be profound and long-lasting.
In conclusion, Trump's presidency is not just about corruption; it's about a fundamental break with the American social order, a shift that could have far-reaching consequences for the nation's future. The implications are profound, and the impact on the American political system could be immense.
